Granville Community Calendar

JOINT COUNCILP/LANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETINGVILLAGE OF GRANVILLEJUNE 26, 1991CALL TO ORDERMayor Eisenberg called the meeting to order at 7: 30 p.m.ROLL CALLVillage Council:Councilmember MarshallCouncilmember FreytagCouncilmember HughesMembers Absent:Councilmember MalcuitCouncilmember RaderPlanning Commission:Larry HueyLyn RobertsonMember Absent:Harold SargentVice MayorMayorManagerJurgen PapeMichael SnyderAlso Present: Eric Phillips, Granville Zoning InspectorCitizens who signed the register were:Jeff OffenbakerJudy CookeReese Dwyer, IIISusan RichardsonJOINT PUBLIC HEARINGBobbi OffenbakerMark AndrewKirsten PapeSarah RobinsonMorrowEisenbergPlunkettLinda RobertsonJoAnn MoreyWilliam TathamSusan KarianThe purpose of the public hearing was to take public comment onthe matter of home occupations.The matter of home occupations came up when the Villagereceived an anonymous complaint regarding a resident conducting a home occupation (child care center),in the home, without apermit to do so. The person who made the charge also complainedabout toys in the yard and sidewalk. Since the Village Managerand Zoning Inspector need to follow any complaints (anonymous or not),concerning possible code violations, the matter was investigated and it was determined that the resident was indeedproviding child care in the home.11Joint Special MeetingVillage CounciPl/lanning CommissionJune 26, 1991Page 2The Village Manager and Zoning Inspector asked VillageCouncil for guidance on child care in the home, and would theyconsider such a service as a home occupation. If caring for a fewchildren (or baby sitting even one child for pay), weredetermined to be a home occupation thus requiring a conditionaluse permit and a home occupation permit, would in fact such inhouseservices such as music lessons, sewinga/lterations,laundry, novelists, real estate, etc.,be considered homeoccupations as well?Where does one draw the line in making thatdetermination.Vice Mayor Morrow recommended that members look at thecurrent "Home Occupation"Chapter 1181 to see what the chaptersays or doesn' t say.During review of the Chapter, it was noted that "HomeOccupations" are listed as Conditional Uses in all residentialsections of the Codified Ordinances of Granville Part Eleven -Zoning Code except Planned Unit Development District which listshome occupations as a permitted use. So in most cases, when onewants to conduct a home occupation it generally requires theConditional Use Permit process: filing an application, paying a fifty dollar fee, and the scheduling of a public hearing. If theConditional Use Permit is approved, the applicant must also get a permit from the Zoning Inspector to conduct the home occupation.Vice Mayor Morrow questioned why home occupations are considered conditional uses in other districts and not PUD?Councilmember Marshall agreed that it shouldn' t, justanother item to be cleaned up during the zoning re-write.Public comment during the hearing centered on the child care issue, since the issue affects dual income families who have aneed for such service, rather than the issue of Home Occupationsin general. Many expressed that those who are providing childcare (baby sitting),in the home, shouldn' t require a permit todo so, as long as it. didn' t violate the limit set by StateRegulations of108*'6¥r more children. Those who spoke to the issue of child care in the home were: Judy Cooke, N. Granger Street, Linda Robertson, 352 N. Pearl Street, and Susan Richardson, 211 West Elm Street, Jeff Offenbaker, 316 West Maple Street.Letters received on behalf of child care in general: Nancy Hughes, 630 Newark Road, (who was not present but asked that herletter be read during the public hearing)M, arilyn Andrews, 217 West Elm Street, and Susan Freeman, 75 Denbigh Drive (letters received prior to the hearing)C.opies of those letters are attached as part of these minutes.49 -19**R*iod*A, . d.,ibze4*- ,»2,1;2;U;X269b«11Joint Special MeetingVillage CounciPl/lanning CommissionJune 26, 1991Page 3Expressed views during the public hearing:Most public comments expressed, leaned towards notregulating child care givers unless they exceed the limit of overfive children. No comments were offered on other types of homeoccupations.Expressed views from members of Council and the PlanningCommission with regard to child care givers varied from a permitshould be required to no permit should be required.Some felt giving carte blanche to child care givers would not beappropriate. However, a permit from the Zoning Inspector, toconduct such a home occupation wouldn' t be out of order as longas the request was for no more than five children. The applicantwouldn' t have to apply for a Conditional Use Permit. Noting, thatchild care does have an impact on a neighborhood, and this wouldallow for some recourse to cancel the permit if guidelines were violated.Others felt that any home occupation, including child careservice should be considered like any other home occupationrequiring an applicant to apply for a Conditional Use Permit anda Home Occupation Permit, thereby giving neighbors the right tovoice their opinions, and gives some control to revoke a permit.One member of Council felt that the matter of baby sitting shouldbe dealt with as a separate issue. Pick a number (4 or 5),andexclude that service from the home occupation requirements.Consensus of members of Village Council and Planning Commissionwas to direct this issue along with comments made at tonight' s public hearing to the Zoning Re- write group and to do their bestto rewrite the Chapter on Home Occupations.The public hearing closed at 9:08 p.m.,MEETING ANNOUNCEMENTSJuly 10. 1991. 7: 30 p.m.WorksessionJuly 17. 1991. 730 p.m.July 18. 1991. 7: 30 9.m.Village Council/Planning CommissionRegular Council MeetingPlanning Commission Meetingp.m. -Village Council/ Planning Commission July 24. 1991, 7: 301Joint Special MeetingVillage CounciPl/lanning CommissionJune 26, 1991Page 4Motion for adjournment was made by Planning Commission memberSnyder, seconded by Vice Mayor Morrow.Meeting adjourned at 9: 10 p.m.